N9391M destroyed at KOSH

[Echo]

11 hours ago, JoshK said:

I offered that opportunity, he replied with another sarcastic remark. Then a third.

I’m not saying all of his 11,000+ posts are worthless post pumping. Nor did I say he didn’t contribute substantially. What I said was he’s rude without cause.

I started and continue to run a niche sector, public facing business. There are still a few folks in my industry who have or had attitudes like him: the old guy who assumes he knows more than the next guy and he’s rude about it. Most of them have closed shop or reduced their footprint to a small fraction of their previous influence because they were used to getting away with being rude to customers and other people telling the customer “yeah but he builds great stuff… wait for it and don’t ask questions or bother him”

That doesn’t fly these days. Telling someone to grovel around a new place simply because they’re new and they shouldn’t say anything to offend someone only perpetuates the situation. Now the feedback online is “yeah, so amd so builds great stuff but he’s an asshole and I can get the same quality work from a dozen other shops that don’t treat customers poorly.”

We help folks all the time who are not customers (yet) and even when it’s something easy/simple the basic respect to deal straight with them goes a long way. Doesn’t matter if it is one of the many forums, Facebook, or email traffic.

Why would it be required for me to endure snide remarks from someone about unpublished information that I am expected it to “just know”? Especially when I asked how/where and he gave me more sarcasm.

Nor was I the only one to call him out for being rude. Someone else commented about his responses and even others made comments about the prevalence of such behavior. In business we call it “sales repellent”. He’s free to behave as he likes, just as I’m free to call it as I see it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You miss my/our point.  WE were customers and YOU just got our free product taken from us.  Bud, do you understand what you did to me/us?  I think not.  I enjoy grumpy.  Clearly some do not...

[dzeleski]

I have largely avoided posting on this but since more and more people are quitting that have helped me directly with problems with my J, I just have to ask.... How did this thread spiral this hard? How did it turn into personal attacks and people quitting the site over one of our own members having their airplane destroyed?

Its honestly fairly gross considering @druidjaidan was probably largely just looking for support during a time his airplane was destroyed which is probably one of his pride and joys on top of his entire family being minutes from being in a final destination episode.

Clarence leaving over this is a giant loss. In the 4-5 years ive been here hes helped me several times publicly and in DMs get my issues resolved or pointed in the right direction. Popular knowledgeable posters continuing to leave will slowly cause this forum to not be helpful to anyone. Quite sad to see considering how much I have learned from people like Clarence (for literally $0... in aviation....)

@druidjaidan Im sorry about your airplane, I hope you can find a suitable replacement when possible and I hope your family is doing as well as they can be.

[Pinecone]

2 hours ago, A64Pilot said:

I’ve looked it up, the ambulance chasers usually get about 40%, and almost never go to court as that takes time and effort, almost always they settle for what they can get without putting much effort in it, their model is many, many settlements end up being a significant amount of money.

And some are charging their expenses to the client's 60%.  So they get a clear profit of 40%, plus profit on what they bill the client for in costs.

[JoshK]

You miss my/our point.  WE were customers and YOU just got our free product taken from us.  Bud, do you understand what you did to me/us?  I think not.  I enjoy grumpy.  Clearly some do not...

Uh let’s step back before you want to blame me for all of it.

I engaged with him on a total of half a dozen posts in this thread only. If you’re so concerned with it perhaps you should look at why he spent years here only to have one person cause him to leave? No way, he was on his way out the door. I won’t accept blame for years of behavior before I was here.

If you enjoy grumpy then call up Clarence and tell him you miss his presence and would appreciate it if he comes back… this way you can get your free product back.

There’s no way my comments to him about being rude caused him to leave on this thread alone. The fact is he decided to take his ball and leave shows one of two things: It was simply enough overall for him at whatever level of skin thickness and there is plenty of “blame” to spread around for a long time before I got here and called him to the carpet for being rude to me. Perhaps He realized how much time he was spending here with little to nothing showing back for his endeavors and certain folks liked him not for the discussion but for the free nature of the info.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tim-37419]

On 7/30/2023 at 11:42 AM, ilovecornfields said:

Anyone else get uncomfortable when they think about how safe we convince ourselves GA is and then think about all the accidents/fatalities at or or the way to Oshkosh each year? I guess we’re still doing better than Sturgis, but not by much.

I had the exact same thought. Actually, mine was even harsher. I don't care if it's sun n fun or osh, if you are attracting enough people to create an unsafe environment than you are responsible/accountable/culpable and have lost your way when it comes to being an advocate for safety. 

[glbtrottr]

if you are attracting enough people to create an unsafe environment than you are responsible/accountable/culpable and have lost your way when it comes to being an advocate for safety. 

Thank you for explaining what I meant when I said EAA may have some legal liability here that would cause a jury to award.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Justin Schmidt]

44 minutes ago, Tim-37419 said:

I had the exact same thought. Actually, mine was even harsher. I don't care if it's sun n fun or osh, if you are attracting enough people to create an unsafe environment than you are responsible/accountable/culpable and have lost your way when it comes to being an advocate for safety. 

I am at the point in my life where, despite all my mitigations, if it's my time it's my time. Why waste "what if" on blocking the life I should be living.

[Pinecone]

2 hours ago, JoshK said:

Uh let’s step back before you want to blame me for all of it.

I engaged with him on a total of half a dozen posts in this thread only. If you’re so concerned with it perhaps you should look at why he spent years here only to have one person cause him to leave? No way, he was on his way out the door. I won’t accept blame for years of behavior before I was here.

If you enjoy grumpy then call up Clarence and tell him you miss his presence and would appreciate it if he comes back… this way you can get your free product back.

There’s no way my comments to him about being rude caused him to leave on this thread alone. The fact is he decided to take his ball and leave shows one of two things: It was simply enough overall for him at whatever level of skin thickness and there is plenty of “blame” to spread around for a long time before I got here and called him to the carpet for being rude to me. Perhaps He realized how much time he was spending here with little to nothing showing back for his endeavors and certain folks liked him not for the discussion but for the free nature of the info.

You are sounding like a 5 year old.  I didn't do it.  It wasn't me.  It is not my fault.

Great way to start in a new community.

[JoshK]

9 minutes ago, Pinecone said:

You are sounding like a 5 year old.  I didn't do it.  It wasn't me.  It is not my fault.

Great way to start in a new community.

So you’re saying because I’m new then I should

 

a) tolerate mediocre (at best) behavior from one long standing member because he is a long standing member.

b) accept responsibility for something I didn’t do simply because I’m the FNG so that the others who were part of the clique have someone to scapegoat? 

c) not reply to illogically constricted arguments by those who want to blame someone singular for what is a longer/larger situation. 

“We don’t care who you are, what your experience, or what you might have available to bring to the community; sit on the sidelines and don’t rile those of us who have been here a while. Oh… welcome?” 

Sounds like a great place for new members the way some of you explain what is expected.  Long story short, it’s a big jump to say someone got so upset from my reply alone that he up and quit a place that has been a frequent haunt for years. 
 

While I may be the lightning rod there hasn’t been a total vacuum on my end of the discussion. Perhaps some of what I said actually needed saying and the ruffled feathers were overdue if people are liking posts and/or making supportive replies to things I’ve said. 

[druidjaidan]

21 hours ago, T. Peterson said:

I am truly sorry about your airplane and I am even more grateful that your family is safe, but in my opinion EAA is not responsible for your loss. No organization can possibly imagine or prevent every type of accident. Oshkosh crams thousands of airplanes into tight quarters and this is inherently risky. You chose to participate indicating you were okay with the risk until something bad happened to you and now you feel you are owed. I simply disagree. This mindset has shut down many potential wonderful events because organizers will not risk the potential litigation. The abuses of tort law have also significantly contributed to the rising costs of GA. Accidents happen and even if I am a totally innocent victim, that alone does not grant me the right to go after someone else making them an innocent victim.  That is not to say there are not cases of gross negligence in which someone ought to be sued, but I don’t see that here.

So let me explain further. I think it is likely that EAA has some blame in this accident. I think it's obvious the pilots flying, probably the gyro have the majority of the fault, but also likely the helicopter pilot has some as well even if minority. I'm pretty sure I have 0 responsibility in the incident considering I was parked.

So what happens now? In theory, my insurance would make me whole, but they won't come close in reality. Hopefully, the pilot(s) insurance will come through, but we don't even know if the gyro pilot has insurance. He's not talking to anyone, or at least not anyone who we have contact with or our own insurance. Apparently gyrocopter insurance is "prohibitively expensive".

I think blaming EAA for the accident is pretty unsavory, but let me pose a few thoughts where I think EAA could end up shouldering some fault. Apparently, the gyro pilot had been warned about unauthorized procedures in the pattern. Why wasn't he removed from the approved list if that is true? Some people are claiming the 360 maneuver for spacing is permitted in the safety briefing, if so that seems very short-sighted and likely implicates EAA in the procedure design. Finally, if this was indeed demo flights on the part of a manufacturer (that is what it looks like) I would hope that EAA would require adequate liability insurance, and if they didn't or they failed to verify I believe that ends up with them bearing some responsibility. Also, if this was a demo flight I would think that makes the manufacturer liable. So much about the incident is still unknown that I think it's unreasonable to rule in or out who had how much accountability

I think we all agree the pilot's are primarily responsible, but I also think it's likely they are not alone in the responsibility. I don't view this like the other cases where totally unrelated inculpable parties are being mentioned.

My insurance is inadequate to restore my full loss. Even considering that it is my fault for not upping my hull coverage fast enough to keep up with the market rates that isn't the end of our losses. Maybe this will serve as a lesson for everyone reading about how much insurance they should carry. We have so far account for almost $4,000 in destroyed personal property, we might be able to claim against our homeowners for this. We have accounted for roughly $13,000 in uninsured losses to expenses relating to the accident so far. The majority of that is sales tax on a theoretical replacement plane, but the rest is travel expenses related to the accident. And we haven't yet accounted for the other new purchase costs: pre-buy inspections, travel to/from planes to view them, and the travel costs to return the plane to our home base. That could easily be thousands: 2-3 prebuys, 2-3 two way airfare and a one way ticket to bring the plane back + a trip back that could feasibly be as long as Florida to Washington. I'm sure I'm missing things even then. None of this is even in the realm of "pain and suffering", it's all real money losses.

[glbtrottr]

So let me explain further. I think it is likely that EAA has some blame in this accident. I think it's obvious the pilots flying, probably the gyro have the majority of the fault, but also likely the helicopter pilot has some as well even if minority. I'm pretty sure I have 0 responsibility in the incident considering I was parked.
So what happens now? In theory, my insurance would make me whole, but they won't come close in reality. Hopefully, the pilot(s) insurance will come through, but we don't even know if the gyro pilot has insurance. He's not talking to anyone, or at least not anyone who we have contact with or our own insurance. Apparently gyrocopter insurance is "prohibitively expensive".
I think blaming EAA for the accident is pretty unsavory, but let me pose a few thoughts where I think EAA could end up shouldering some fault. Apparently, the gyro pilot had been warned about unauthorized procedures in the pattern. Why wasn't he removed from the approved list if that is true? Some people are claiming the 360 maneuver for spacing is permitted in the safety briefing, if so that seems very short-sighted and likely implicates EAA in the procedure design. Finally, if this was indeed demo flights on the part of a manufacturer (that is what it looks like) I would hope that EAA would require adequate liability insurance, and if they didn't or they failed to verify I believe that ends up with them bearing some responsibility. Also, if this was a demo flight I would think that makes the manufacturer liable. So much about the incident is still unknown that I think it's unreasonable to rule in or out who had how much accountability
I think we all agree the pilot's are primarily responsible, but I also think it's likely they are not alone in the responsibility. I don't view this like the other cases where totally unrelated inculpable parties are being mentioned.
My insurance is inadequate to restore my full loss. Even considering that it is my fault for not upping my hull coverage fast enough to keep up with the market rates that isn't the end of our losses. Maybe this will serve as a lesson for everyone reading about how much insurance they should carry. We have so far account for almost $4,000 in destroyed personal property, we might be able to claim against our homeowners for this. We have accounted for roughly $13,000 in uninsured losses to expenses relating to the accident so far. The majority of that is sales tax on a theoretical replacement plane, but the rest is travel expenses related to the accident. And we haven't yet accounted for the other new purchase costs: pre-buy inspections, travel to/from planes to view them, and the travel costs to return the plane to our home base. That could easily be thousands: 2-3 prebuys, 2-3 two way airfare and a one way ticket to bring the plane back + a trip back that could feasibly be as long as Florida to Washington. I'm sure I'm missing things even then. None of this is even in the realm of "pain and suffering", it's all real money losses.

Alright!

Glad you’re thinking this through, OP.

So we have a non cooperative non communicative party at fault, another party possibly at fault that’s deceased, the recognition that EAA may have liability, and the twist I missed which was the demo flight / the manufacturer.

I think I was lucky enough to explain why people litigate, all while being accused of using “emotional” discourse to make the point.

If the insurance is prohibitively expensive and you can’t shoulder the burden including destroying and airplane and killing two people, why are you flying??? And why shouldn’t you be sued into oblivion or be incarcerated since you couldn’t properly follow directions???

[T. Peterson]

14 minutes ago, druidjaidan said:

So let me explain further. I think it is likely that EAA has some blame in this accident. I think it's obvious the pilots flying, probably the gyro have the majority of the fault, but also likely the helicopter pilot has some as well even if minority. I'm pretty sure I have 0 responsibility in the incident considering I was parked.

So what happens now? In theory, my insurance would make me whole, but they won't come close in reality. Hopefully, the pilot(s) insurance will come through, but we don't even know if the gyro pilot has insurance. He's not talking to anyone, or at least not anyone who we have contact with or our own insurance. Apparently gyrocopter insurance is "prohibitively expensive".

I think blaming EAA for the accident is pretty unsavory, but let me pose a few thoughts where I think EAA could end up shouldering some fault. Apparently, the gyro pilot had been warned about unauthorized procedures in the pattern. Why wasn't he removed from the approved list if that is true? Some people are claiming the 360 maneuver for spacing is permitted in the safety briefing, if so that seems very short-sighted and likely implicates EAA in the procedure design. Finally, if this was indeed demo flights on the part of a manufacturer (that is what it looks like) I would hope that EAA would require adequate liability insurance, and if they didn't or they failed to verify I believe that ends up with them bearing some responsibility. Also, if this was a demo flight I would think that makes the manufacturer liable. So much about the incident is still unknown that I think it's unreasonable to rule in or out who had how much accountability

I think we all agree the pilot's are primarily responsible, but I also think it's likely they are not alone in the responsibility. I don't view this like the other cases where totally unrelated inculpable parties are being mentioned.

My insurance is inadequate to restore my full loss. Even considering that it is my fault for not upping my hull coverage fast enough to keep up with the market rates that isn't the end of our losses. Maybe this will serve as a lesson for everyone reading about how much insurance they should carry. We have so far account for almost $4,000 in destroyed personal property, we might be able to claim against our homeowners for this. We have accounted for roughly $13,000 in uninsured losses to expenses relating to the accident so far. The majority of that is sales tax on a theoretical replacement plane, but the rest is travel expenses related to the accident. And we haven't yet accounted for the other new purchase costs: pre-buy inspections, travel to/from planes to view them, and the travel costs to return the plane to our home base. That could easily be thousands: 2-3 prebuys, 2-3 two way airfare and a one way ticket to bring the plane back + a trip back that could feasibly be as long as Florida to Washington. I'm sure I'm missing things even then. None of this is even in the realm of "pain and suffering", it's all real money losses.

I have nothing to add other than that I am very sorry this tragic accident occurred and I am very sorry your airplane was destroyed. 

[druidjaidan]

12 minutes ago, glbtrottr said:

If the insurance is prohibitively expensive and you can’t shoulder the burden including destroying and airplane and killing two people, why are you flying??? And why shouldn’t you be sued into oblivion or be incarcerated since you couldn’t properly follow directions???

We don't know for a fact that he doesn't have insurance, he isn't talking. His not having insurance is conjecture based on an aviation attorney who said "most" gryocopters are uninsured. He could be wrong, or maybe this one is an exception since it's being used for demo flights. We won't know until the pilot starts talking. As of right now I only know who the pilot is only because social media has leaked it. The EAA hasn't told us, our insurance hasn't penetrated past the anonymous LLC that the gyro is registered to, the pilot hasn't come forward. Imagine that this pilot tries to hide behind his LLC with inevitably no assets except the gyrocopter itself.

Yeah, there's a reason I haven't been sleeping well for the past week.

[exM20K]

57 minutes ago, druidjaidan said:

My insurance is inadequate to restore my full loss. Even considering that it is my fault for not upping my hull coverage fast enough to keep up with the market rates that isn't the end of our losses. Maybe this will serve as a lesson for everyone reading about how much insurance they should carry. We have so far account for almost $4,000 in destroyed personal property, we might be able to claim against our homeowners for this. We have accounted for roughly $13,000 in uninsured losses to expenses relating to the accident so far. The majority of that is sales tax on a theoretical replacement plane, but the rest is travel expenses related to the accident. And we haven't yet accounted for the other new purchase costs: pre-buy inspections, travel to/from planes to view them, and the travel costs to return the plane to our home base. That could easily be thousands: 2-3 prebuys, 2-3 two way airfare and a one way ticket to bring the plane back + a trip back that could feasibly be as long as Florida to Washington. I'm sure I'm missing things even then. None of this is even in the realm of "pain and suffering", it's all real money losses.

All these are very real costs and the non-hull value losses would have been incurred by you even if you were insured for replacement value.  Additionally, there is loss of use and, in the state Illinois (with which i'm familiar and is maybe similar to Washington in this regard) you will pay sales tax on the full value of the replacement plane.  Ouch.

 

I will be reviewing my policies with an eye towards these uninsured losses.  Perhaps you have homeowner's insurance that would cover the personal property, and often aviation policies will cover "recovery" of a downed plane, so could that include your trip home in the Germ Tube? Maybe - it's times like this that having a good agent on your side is so important.

I wish you the best.

-dan

[LANCECASPER]

In going to Oshkosh a few times over the years I've had no desire to be part of the airshow, so I've landed in Fon Du Lac, Appleton, etc. 

In 1997 I flew to Minnesota on a Friday with a couple friends, stayed over and then Saturday my brother jumped in and we flew over to see Oshkosh for the day. We landed in Fon Du Lac and took the shuttle bus up to Oshkosh. They had us park on the grass perpendicular to a taxiway and parked as many airplanes as they could fit. 

After a long hot day we we took the shuttle back to Fon Du lac for a flight back to MN. As the shuttle bus got closer to my Mooney on the taxiway I looked ahead and saw a group of people with miscellaneous airplane parts strewn around them. I began to wonder about my one year old Bravo and if some of those parts belonged to it and how I was going to get back to MN and then TX. When we got up to the scene the wreckage stopped one airplane from mine . . . whew

What had happened was that one of the pilots getting ready to leave forgot to untie his tail tie-down and kept adding power and kept adding power until he was near full power according to onlookers. Once the tie-down let loose he spun around and took the out the airplane on each side of him and the three across from him. I've often wondered if everyone was fairly compensated and I've always been grateful that one of those owners wasn't me. I almost felt a little guilty leaving unscathed with a couple of the owners standing there aware of what happened and three that still had no idea that something had happened.

Best wishes @druidjaidan on everything working out in your favor. So happy that you and your family weren’t near the Mooney when it happened. Having all of you with no physical injuries is amazing. Airplanes can be replaced.




 

[Pinecone]

Take out 5 airplanes and 1 million in insurance may not be enough.

And if limited to 100,000 per claim, there will be additional attempts at recovery.

But again, the best thing is to be properly insured for YOUR airplane and let your insurance deal with going after the other person and their insurance and other assets.

[exM20K]

Prelim is out. 

-dan

[LANCECASPER]

2 hours ago, exM20K said:

Prelim is out. 

-dan

The link isn't working

[AdamJD]

https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/192738/pdf

[bcg]

On Beechtalk, members yesterdat are quoting a Facebook group which the Mooney owner belongs to:
"The guy that owned the Mooney that the Gyrocopter landed on is in my local area and is a member of a facebook group that I also belong too.

To add to the sadness and absurdity of the situation, he is now reporting that neither pilot or aircraft involved in the accident were insured and therefore he will only be paid out by his own insurance for the hull loss.

He reports he will be taking enough of a loss trying to replace the plane that he is likely to just hang it up for good. Lots of discussion about liability and lawsuits to "make it right", but I get the feeling he doesn't seem to want to have to deal with that can of worms... not sure I blame him."
And:
"I'm on the same FB group and read the same post. An added wrinkle is that EAA required liability insurance for exhibitors, presumably including both the helicopter and gyro companies. Did EAA just take their word for it, or did they provide fake documents, or what? That affects who could be sued."
And:
"I think the person in this instance is just totally mentally beat down by the entire thing and now on top of it he has to go to war with the insurance company. He also mentioned that they are telling him they will only give him that partial payout if he signs an agreement to not litigate anything related to the incident, which always rubs me the wrong way."
BeechTalk - BT - Mid-air at OSH

The gyrocopter was being demoed for a potential buyer by the manufacturer when it crashed. The customer was in the right seat. I ran into them and saw the pilot when I had to divert to Sparta, TN for weather on my meandering path home, the pilot was pretty beat up. It seems hard to believe a manufacturer wouldn't have adequate insurance to cover this. Property only claims are easy, we can put an objective value on property.

Sent from my Pixel 6a using Tapatalk

[druidjaidan]

21 minutes ago, bcg said:

The gyrocopter was being demoed for a potential buyer by the manufacturer when it crashed. The customer was in the right seat. I ran into them and saw the pilot when I had to divert to Sparta, TN for weather on my meandering path home, the pilot was pretty beat up. It seems hard to believe a manufacturer wouldn't have adequate insurance to cover this. Property only claims are easy, we can put an objective value on property.

Sent from my Pixel 6a using Tapatalk
 

My experience so far with the 3 lawyers I've spoken to (and 2 more that haven't replied I suppose) that property only claims aren't financially viable to litigate.  Too low of value. Maybe I'm just talking to the wrong lawyers.

Did he tell you it was a demo or are you assuming it? If he was doing a demo that's useful information to have confirmed.

[bcg]

My experience so far with the 3 lawyers I've spoken to (and 2 more that haven't replied I suppose) that property only claims aren't financially viable to litigate.  Too low of value. Maybe I'm just talking to the wrong lawyers.
Did he tell you it was a demo or are you assuming it? If he was doing a demo that's useful information to have confirmed.

That's true about attorneys, I meant with insurance companies. There's usually less pushback from insurance on property only claims.

One of the employees of the company told me it was a demo, she said she'd spent several hours talking to the guy and scheduled it for him earlier in the day.

Sent from my Pixel 6a using Tapatalk

[PeteMc]

On 8/15/2023 at 7:36 AM, 1980Mooney said:

The guy that owned the Mooney that the Gyrocopter landed on is in my local area and is a member of a facebook group that I also belong too.

There was some discussion on the FB page by people who are vendors at OSH that they require insurance.  And if the EAA did not insure that they had insurance, it may fall back on them for allowing the Demos (I think there was more than this flight) then it may fall back on them.  

It will be interesting what the outcome is if the Mooney owner ends up with an aggressive attorney that gets to the bottom of it all.  Hope he's ultimate compensated. 

 

[Pinecone]

12 hours ago, 1980Mooney said:

The ELA 10 Eclipse gyrocopter has tandem seating.  I assume you mean the customer was in the rear seat.  Note that the ELA can be equipped with rear seat full flight controls with stick and throttle and rear rudder pedals..

https://www.beechtalk.com/forums/download/file.php?id=416137&mode=view

BeechTalk - BT - Mid-air at OSH  See page 13

Does anyone know if the rear seat in N221EL had full dual controls? And if so, there is the question of who actually was the PIC at the time of the accident.  I suspect that no-one has admitted anything so far.

 

Be careful how you use PIC.

The prospective buyer could have to been flying, but NOT the PIC.  May not even be rated in gyros.

[druidjaidan]

18 hours ago, PeteMc said:

There was some discussion on the FB page by people who are vendors at OSH that they require insurance.  And if the EAA did not insure that they had insurance, it may fall back on them for allowing the Demos (I think there was more than this flight) then it may fall back on them.  

It will be interesting what the outcome is if the Mooney owner ends up with an aggressive attorney that gets to the bottom of it all.  Hope he's ultimate compensated. 

 

Right about now I'd take any attorney to help advise us, let alone an aggressive one. We've been turned down by all 5 attorneys we've reached out to after the consultation reviewing our options (from simply helping ensure we don't sign something we shouldn't, up to could we litigate). Roughly the answer has been basically: "we don't do hourly only contingency, and your claim doesn't have injuries so no matter the viability we won't help"

Edited August 17, 2023 by druidjaidan